The proceeding is an appeal from Astrazeneca Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2015 FCA 158 (Esomeprazole). The Federal Court had found (in 2014 FC 638) that, while the patent made certain promises, the promise was neither demonstrated nor soundly predicted at the time the patent was filed. On the appeal, AstraZeneca asserted that the Federal Court erred in law by misconstruing the promise of the relevant claims. More specifically, it argued that the Federal Court erred by failing to consider utility, and any promise of utility, on a claim by claim basis, erred by construing the utility of the claims in issue in a manner that was inconsistent with their inventive concept and further erred by failing to apply a purposive construction to the promise of utility. The Court disagreed that the Federal Court erred and dismissed the appeal with costs.

At the Supreme Court, a number of organizations have sought to intervene. Copies of the materials for the following intervenors are

Recent Posts

Contributions

Blog

About Me

I am a partner at DLA Piper (Canada) LLP practicing in the area of intellectual property. Material on this website are my own views and do not reflect the position of DLA Piper (Canada) LLP, any of its member firms around the world, or any of its clients. IPPractice.ca grew out of my hobby to gather and share interesting updates on intellectual property to friends and colleagues. This website does not provide legal advice, and should not be relied upon. Hope you enjoy the site - Alan Macek